Interference or no call

[tornado]

Pony league baseball. Runner on first. Batter doubles to left and tries for third. SS accidentally runs into him and knocks him down about 1/3 of the way from 2nd. Batter/runner scrambles back to second, just beating the throw from left. Runner from first had stopped at third while the interference(?) took place. Without the interference I would probably have had two runners on 3rd.

Ruling please? No harm, no foul, leave the runners at 2nd and 3rd, or should R3 get home and batter/runner get 3rd?

Thanks in advance...

[tornado]

I know I should have called this obstruction instead of interference, Sorry.

[chris s]

Originally posted by tornado
Pony league baseball. Runner on first. Batter doubles to left and tries for third. SS accidentally runs into him and knocks him down about 1/3 of the way from 2nd. Batter/runner scrambles back to second, just beating the throw from left. Runner from first had stopped at third while the interference(?) took place. Without the interference I would probably have had two runners on 3rd.

Ruling please? No harm, no foul, leave the runners at 2nd and 3rd, or should R3 get home and batter/runner get 3rd?

Thanks in advance...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~
As per 7.06(a) or 7.06(b)... Now the question lies.....without the obstruction where would you belive the obstructed runner to advance without the hinderence?
In the case you related, PONY ball, I would be inclined to award the BR 3rd and score the advanced runner. If the BR had been hindered by the F6 or F4 standing on the bag at second(happens often),we still have an OBS case, but...if that is it, protect him back to 2cd bag.

Bottom line is, the umpire shall award what he/she believes is an acceptable award to the obstructed runner based on what the ump thinks the runner would have gotten without the obs

[Warren Willson]

Originally posted by tornado
Pony league baseball. Runner on first. Batter doubles to left and tries for third. SS accidentally runs into him and knocks him down about 1/3 of the way from 2nd. Batter/runner scrambles back to second, just beating the throw from left. Runner from first had stopped at third while the interference(?) took place. Without the interference I would probably have had two runners on 3rd.

Ruling please? No harm, no foul, leave the runners at 2nd and 3rd, or should R3 get home and batter/runner get 3rd?

Thanks in advance...

The question you have to ask is whether or not the throw to 2nd was a "play" (NAPBL/PBUC 3.1) on the B-R and did the obstruction happen either before or after the throw was released.

• If the throw was released BEFORE the obstruction then you have Type A Obstruction (ie Obstruction under 7.06a - a play being made on the obstructed runner). In that case you MUST award the B-R to 3rd base and send the advance runner home on the force.

• If the throw was released AFTER the obstruction then you have Type B Obstruction (ie. Obstruction under OBR 7.06b - no play being made on the obstructed runner). The current Authoritative Opinion - in this case from both Jim Evans and the WUA - says that there is no automatic award on Type B obstruction. It is entirely umpire judgement as to whether the runner would have advanced SAFELY absent the obstruction.

Where you have a runner who returned to a previous base after an obstruction, you also have to ask whether the runner returned (a) because of the obstruction or (b) because he believed he would be out if he continued. In case (a) you might STILL award the advance base, as long as you firmly believed the runner would have acquired it SAFELY absent the obstruction.

Bottom line is you had to be there, but given your description of the direction and timing of the throw, I'd say to leave the runners where they were and get the B-R to buy the opposing SS a soda for saving his bacon! *BIG grin*

Hope this helps

Cheers

[Bfair]

I would agree with Warren's assessment, and add to that information this play from J/R:

R2, one out. The batter hits a pop fly to shallow right center field. Misplayed, the ball drops amidst three fielders. R2 is unable to advance and has returned to second. The batter-runner rounds first aggressively and is obstructed, but continues his advance to second without hesitation. He is able to reach second, and jointly occupies it with R2, when both runner are tagged: the batter-runner (following runner) is out. He must realize that R2 has not advanced. The obstruction does not give him license to ignore the actions of his teammate while advancing.

In your scenario, it is likely a Type B obstruction since the BR, after the obstruction, returned to 2B where the throw then came from left in an attempt to retire him. If the BR was legitimately advancing at the time of the obstruction, it would seem the throw from left would have been going to 3B in an attempt to retire him there if it had already been released. Fielders typically don't throw to the base behind the runner in an attempt to retire him at his advance base. Therefore, the throw going to 2B is an indicator that it likely originated after the obstruction and after BR's decision to return to 2B.

With Type B obstruction, you should nullify the act of the obstruction. Without R1 advancing beyond 3B, it was not possible for BR to safely acquire 3B. Even if BR advanced to 3B, R1 would be entitled to the base. With that said, there is no reason to advance BR to 3B even if he could have beaten a throw there because BR could not have safely acquired that base.

Had BR safely advanced to touch 3B after the obstruction, you would not award him that base if he was put out after discovering he jointly occupied it with R1.

Type B obstruction is not necessarily a free ticket to DisneyWorld---despite what many offensive coaches and players may at times think. It is not cause to protect a runner from his own stupidity regarding other factors occurring within the game.


Freix